Federalism, Functionalism, Transactionalism
and Neofunctionalism
Dr Monika Brusenbauch Meislová
IRE110 Theory of International Relations and European Integration
12 March 2019
Theories: introduction
̶ Theories of politics contain three operations:
̶ Judgements of political facts, or estimates of probability
̶ Observation of causal relationships between elements of political facts (logical
compatibility)
̶ Valuations and norms, which distort the perception of facts
(Sabine, George H., 1968: A history of political theory. London: Harrap, p. V.)
Theories: introduction
What are theories good for?
̶ Theories to discover the ‘laws’ of European politics
̶ Theories as maps of the world
̶ Theories for critique and questioning
(knowledge about politics is not neutral)
̶ Theories also useful and separates ‘academic’ work
from ‘journalistic’ work 
Theories: introduction
̶ Purpose of European integration theories
̶ To describe a phenomenon
̶ To explain a phenomenon
̶ To predict a phenomenon
̶ + To provide normative guidance
̶ A “phenomenon“ understood as:
̶ the speed and direction of European integration overall
̶ the speed and direction of individual policies
̶ the failure to establish certain policies
̶ why progress occurred at certain times and not others
Theories: introduction
European integration: introduction
Definition of European integration:
̶ A process whereby political actors in several distinct national settings are persuaded to shift their
loyalties, expectations and political activities toward a new centre, whose institutions possess or
demand jurisdiction over pre-existing national states. The end result of a process of political integration
is a new political community, superimposed over the pre-existing ones.
(Haas, Ernst B., 1968: The Uniting of Europe. 1950-1957. Stanford: Stanford UP, p. 16.)
European integration: introduction
In general, integration theories focus on five important dimensions of the process.
̶ the content (or essence) of integration processes;
̶ the organizational forms and institutions of integration;
̶ regulation (policies) and governance of integration;
̶ the advantages and disadvantages of integration (cost-benefit analysis);
̶ the problems of integration maturity (capacities or capabilities for integration).
European integration: introduction
Four "locations" of European integration theory
̶ The EU as International Organization: what does the EU tell us about the broader category of international
organizations?
̶ EU as a region within the global political economy: what does the EU tell us on states clustering into regional blocs?
̶ EU and policy-making: what does the EU tell us about the dynamics of policy-making in an interacting political
system of nation states and an international organization?
̶ EU as a sui generic phenomenon: a) EU and European integration are not treated as an instance of anything other
than itself; EU there-fore cannot be a testing site for broader generalizations; b) EU as an historically-rooted
phenomenon
(Rosamond, Ben, 2000: Theories of European Integration. Houndsmills: MacMillan, p. 14-16.)
Theories of European integration
Early integration theories
̶ 1920s to 1950s
̶ Federalism
̶ Functionalism
̶ Transactionalism
Federalism
̶ Federalists plan to form a small nucleus of nonconformists seeking to point out that the national states
have lost their proper rights since they cannot guarantee the political and economic safety of their
citizens
(Spinelli, Altiero, 1972: The Growth of the European Movement since the Second World War, in: Mark Hodges (ed.): European
Integration. Harmondsworth: Penguin, p. 68).
The classic account of European integration derives from federalism’ (Hill and Smith, 2005: 20)
• Often misunderstood theoretical perspective.
• Federalism constructed as “a way of bringing together previously separate, autonomous or territorial
units to constitute a new form of union“ (Wiener and Diez 2004: 26).
• Key logic: function follows form
• Two main viewpoints:
1) European federalism as political objective (prescriptive model for federal EU integration and
development)
2) Federalism as an explanatory framework for analysing the nature of the contemporary EU
Federalism
̶ Altiero Spinelli (intellectual foundation of federalism + Ernesto Rossi)
̶ One of the founding fathers of the EU
̶ Ventotene Manifesto (1941)
̶ Impact on post-war European Federalist Movement (Hague Congress 1948)
̶ “States have lost their proper rights since they cannot guarantee the political and economic safety of
their citizens. They also insist that European Union should be brought about by the European
populations, and not by diplomats, by directly electing a European constituent assembly” (Spinelli).
Federalism
̶ The federalists favour supranational, effective community power structures and institutions.
̶ "Theoretical" proposition shared by many political actors engaged in the early process of European
integration
̶ Normative goal of federalists: establish a federation of European states instead of competing nation
states
̶ Guiding principle: study of federal systems (with their mixture of unity and diversity) helps designing
an adequate European polity
̶ Political strategy: institutions first (function follows form)
̶ Pessimistic view of states and class divisions.
Federalism
Critique
̶ Limits in terms of understanding EU integration
̶ Limited explanatory value.
Functionalism
̶ "Classical theory of regional integration that holds that a common need for technocratic management of
economic and social policy leads to the for-mation of international agencies. Such agencies promote
economic wel-fare, thus eventually gaining legitimacy, overcoming ideological opposi-tion to strong
international institutions, and in the long-run evolving into a sort of international government, though
perhaps not a true state."
(Dinan, Desmond (ed.), 2000: Encyclopedia of the European Union. Boulder/London: Lynne Rienner, p. 245.)
Functionalism
̶ Belongs to the liberal tradition of IR theory
̶ Political strategy: form follows function.
̶ Nation states seen as increasingly incapable of fulfilling its basic social, economic and political tasks →
more and more shared aims and functions should be delegated to the more efficient integration
organizations, which are capable to implement these more suitably.
̶ Establishment of functional/technocratic agencies that would serve particular functions
Functionalism
David Mitrany (1888-1975); "A Working Peace System" (1944)
̶ Proposal: transfer functional tasks from governments to international agencies
̶ People loajalties would shift from nation states to support for the technocratic agencies
̶ Maximisation of human welfare
̶ Opposed to comprehensive institutions at national or regional levels
̶ Influenced later advocates of integration
Critique:
̶ technocratic, naïve, poor record of prediction, lack of scientific rigor.
Transactionalism
̶ Security communities (Ferdinand Tönnies: "Gemeinschaft") as entities where the component
governments either retain their separate legal identi-ties or form an institutional fusion. Main hypothesis:
The sense of commu-nity among states is a function of the level of communication between states.
̶ Rosamond, Ben, 2000: Theories of European Integration. Houndsmills: MacMillan, p. 42-48.
Transactionalism
̶ Communication/transactions = means for trust/loyalty → amalgamation/mutual responsiveness →
prerequisites for peace/absence of war.
̶ Sufficient integration at a social level will make conflict unthinkable.
Transactionalism
Karl Deutsch
̶ "Nationalism and Social Communication" (1953)
̶ "Political Community and the North Atlantic Area" (1957)
̶ 1) establishment of ‘security communities’: region in which a large-scale use of violence (such as war)
has become very unlikely or even unthinkable
̶ 2) political integration as a second stage that could follow from this
Critique
̶ Overly descriptive
Neofunctionalism
̶ Integrate modestly in areas of "low politics" which are at the same time "strategic economic sectors".
Create a high authority to promote the integration process. The integration of particular economic
sectors across nations will create functional pressures for the integration of related eco-nomic sectors.
The consequence is the gradual entangling of national economies. Gradually, social interests will shift
their loyalty towards the new supranational center. Deepening economic integration will create the need
for further European institutionalization. Political integration and supranational institutionalization are a
therefore side-effects of economic integration.
(Rosamond, Ben, 2000: Theories of European Integration. Houndsmills: Macmillan: 51-52.)
Neo-functionalism can be read at one level as a theory provoked entirely by the interactive activity
among the original six member states"
(Rosamond, Ben, 2000: Theories of European Integration. Houndsmills: Macmillan: p. 10)
Neofunctionalism
̶ Parallels with functionalism:
̶ Centrality of technical cooperation, technocratic decision-making, incremental change and learning
processes.
̶ Differences from functionalism:
̶ Less prescriptive.
̶ Specific focus on regional integration (with European Integration as their foremost case in point).
̶ Challenge to traditional IR theory: re-placement of power politics of states by supranational consensus
politics.
̶ "Community method", followed by early figures like Robert Schuman and Jean Monnet
Neofunctionalism
Ernst B. Haas (1924-2003)
̶ "The Uniting of Europe" (1968)
̶ Many contributions to IR/European Integration
̶ Main assumptions
̶ State not unifed actors
̶ Interest groups lobby national governments and become international actors
̶ Initial sectoral integration will spill over beyond states' control.
Neofunctionalism
Spillover
̶ The most important driving process of integration: deepening of integration in one sector is expected to
create pressures for further economic integration within and beyond that sector, leading to functional
needs for a European authority.
̶ E.g. alliance on coal and steel policy triggered the formation of EEC.
̶ Various types of spillover: technical, geographical, political,
Transfer of loyalty
̶ As supranational institutions show themselves to be more effective in dealing with specific problems
than nation-states, national interest groups will re-invent themselves on a regional level and national
policy-makers will try to seek regional solutions for their problems.
Neofunctionalism
Critique
̶ No explanation for stagnation and intergovernmentalist integration
̶ No automatic transition from functional to political spillover
̶ Implausibility (because of continuing relevance of states)
̶ Dangerousness (because of implicit dangers of withering-away of liberal states guaranteeing justice
and liberty)
̶ Ernst Haas (1970s): Neo-functionalism is obsolescent (should rather be seen as a "pre-theory", relying
on a teleological assumption of progress rather than deriving predictions from a general theory).
̶ (1970s – ‘euroscelrosis’, oil crisis, member states inward looking)
̶ Many followers + revival during 1980s (neo-functionalism revived with the Single European Act) and
1990s (SEM, Political Union, EMU)
Neofunctionalism
Neo-neo-functionalism: alternative actors‘ strategies
Philippe Schmitter